Lens for my 60d

Currently I've 60D + 50mm 1.8 ..I am planning to buy a zoom lens with good image quality

Help me to choose one.. My budget is 550$ .

one more question , Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - Does this lens have Image Stebilization ?

I not using tripod much...

What would you be shooting with this lens?

No, the Tamron 28-75 doesn't have IS (just as the Canon 24-70/2.8 doesn't).

You should be able to find a used 18-55 for about $125. If you want to spend more, the 15-85 is a big leap in every way. It runs about $400- $450, used.

No, the 28-75 does not have IS.

It really depends on what you shoot but you could do the Tamron 17-50 non VC easily in your budget and it's a great lens. Or with that budget maybe a used Canon 24-105L but it's f/4 and 24mm isn't very wide on a crop camera.

Canon 17-55 f2.8

Sigma 17-50 f2.8

Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4

I want it for landscapes, and as a walkaround lens

For those uses, i would pick the EF-s 15-85 IS over the various 17-5x/2.8 lenses. It has the wider end for landscapes, as well as a greater focal-range for walkaround use.

You should be able to pick one up used or refurbished, for around $500.

Edit: It's excellent IS also comes in handy for walkaround.

I would seriously consider trying a tripod for landscape shots, though.

How Important is IS , Can we get good results without tripod in non-IS Lenses?

rohitsajeev wrote in post #16759825
How Important is IS , Can we get good results without tripod in non-IS Lenses?

Part of that depends on you. How "steady" you are.

For landscapes, a lot of them are taken at dawn/dusk(sunrise/suns​et), where light may be low and IS or a tripod really helps. You can always bump up the ISO to compensate, but at some point you start introducing unwanted noise into the shot.

For walking around, the faster lenses (17-5x/2.8) can be used without IS, due to the wider aperture, letting in more light= faster shutter speeds. But, that's only if you shoot them at the wider apertures, where depth of field (getting everything you want in sharp focus) can become an issue. As soon as you stop-down that lens, you lose the advantage of the wider aperture, and IS could be a help.

Another thing is, the wider the lens, the less shutter speed needed to keep camera shake at bay. The general rule of thumb is, 1/focal length; so, 100mm=1/100. 24mm= 1/25 (that's for full frame.. with a crop camera, multiply the shutter speed by 1.6 =1/160, 1/40, etc.)

Also, IS only helps with static images, as soon as you're trying to capture a moving image, a faster/wider aperture is needed.. vs, IS.

Heya,

Canon EF-S 15-85 (used)
Canon EF-S 17-85 (used)

You need a tripod for landscape.
You don't need a tripod, nor IS, for walk-around. IS is helpful, but it's not the end-all-be-all. I find it helps with really long focal lengths, and with lower shutter speeds.

Very best,

Thank you for your replies, But i am from India and second hand lenses are really hard to find .

How about sigma 10-20 as walkaround ?

I pretty happy with the tamron 17-50 non vc I bought about a month or two ago. It's great.

MalVeauX wrote in post #16759978
You need a tripod for landscape.

Not necessarily. Having a tripod for the times it is appropriate is a good idea, but not a requirement for landscape.

OP, a 10-20 would likely be much to wide for a walkaround IMO. Something along the lines of a 15-85 or 17-5x would be a better choice giving you more flexibility.

Yeah, 10-20 would most likely be too wide for a walkaround. Some do it, and like it... but not many.
I mean, you have to be conscious of not getting your feet in your shots at the wide end!

Get a Canon 18-55 IS.
It cost less than £100 new.

Better still, get the new STM version.
It won't break your wallet either.

It's perfectly fine for landscapes and walkaround.